Difference between revisions of "Terrorexpertise talk:Bulk List"
m |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Hi Paul, | Hi Paul, | ||
| − | The purpose of this research is to better understand the individuals and institutions involved in shaping our understanding of terrorism. We may hypothesise that powerful state and corporate interests disproportionately shape the public discourse, but it would be dogmatic to | + | The purpose of this research is to better understand the individuals and institutions involved in shaping our understanding of terrorism. We may hypothesise that powerful state and corporate interests disproportionately shape the public discourse, but it would be dogmatic to illiminate critical figures from the offset. |
Noam Chomsky for example is one of the scholars most cited on terrorism as well as one of the most popular authors on the subject. I think it would be dishonest to arbitrarily remove him because we don’t consider him one of the ‘usual suspects’ as you put it. Subsequent research will reveal how different views are marginalised or represented. | Noam Chomsky for example is one of the scholars most cited on terrorism as well as one of the most popular authors on the subject. I think it would be dishonest to arbitrarily remove him because we don’t consider him one of the ‘usual suspects’ as you put it. Subsequent research will reveal how different views are marginalised or represented. | ||
Revision as of 11:35, 31 December 2007
throwing in terrorologists with folks who criticize this entity in one list is less than useful. Chomsky, Barsamian, ...together with the usual suspects... less than useful. There is also an issue of duplicating work that already appears in Spin
Paulo 17:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Paul,
The purpose of this research is to better understand the individuals and institutions involved in shaping our understanding of terrorism. We may hypothesise that powerful state and corporate interests disproportionately shape the public discourse, but it would be dogmatic to illiminate critical figures from the offset.
Noam Chomsky for example is one of the scholars most cited on terrorism as well as one of the most popular authors on the subject. I think it would be dishonest to arbitrarily remove him because we don’t consider him one of the ‘usual suspects’ as you put it. Subsequent research will reveal how different views are marginalised or represented.
Best, Tom
